The Cedar’s Challenge to Arabs

Naiem A. Sherbini

After 30 years of Syrian occupation that oppressed Lebanon, sapped its resources, hampered its development, and messed up their politics, the Lebanese courageously took to the streets in the hundreds of thousands following the assassination of Rafik Hariri to demand Syrian troop withdrawal. The international community stood behind the Lebanese and, contrary to expectations, the Syrians had no option but to leave. A rekindled sense of national pride and identity was thus born. Two months later, the Lebanese exercised their free will in general elections that included all shades of political opinion, even pro-Syria groups. Although the Lebanese elections system is antiquated, carried out in four stages during a month-long process, the people expressed their free will, and the anti-Syria coalition won the required majority to form the next government.

Two observations are noteworthy. First, election participation approached 50% of eligible voters in many districts; it exceeded that ratio in some. Compared to the much lower ratio in rich countries with long-established democratic traditions, this is a strong show of the political awareness of the Lebanese. Citizens were keen to cast their vote. Second, parties that did not win the elections (including pro-Syria) have accepted the results as the free will of the people. Within the framework of the Lebanese constitution, those parties will form the opposition in the parliament. The ballot, not the bullet, now settles Lebanese differences. To Arabs, this challenging model is the very essence of democracy.

The mark of a free election is the a-priori uncertainty about its outcome. No one in advance can be sure about winners and losers. The central idea in a democracy is for variant political factions and parties to compete in the public square. Each presents its own program of governance; the broad lines of political, economic, and social reforms; and how they propose to implement those reforms. The common denominator for all is to respect the electorate, inform the public, maintain civility, and accept the outcome, win or lose. The process ensures that the majority rules; it also protects minority rights. Far from having had perfect elections, the people of Lebanon and their political leaders deserve congratulations for avoiding the abyss of civil war that wreaked the country in the 1970s.

The Lebanese elections and their results give rise to guarded optimism about the future of democracy in Arab countries. Despite sectarian strife, civil wars, tribal conflicts, security plots, external powers meddling, the Arab world appears to be seriously engaged in a democratic transition. In one country after another, the people are expressing their free will to reject the old ways of authoritarian regimes that produced stagnation and poverty. In 2005, voters in Iraq, Palestine, and now Lebanon have freely gone to the polls in the millions to cast their ballots and govern themselves for a better future. Come the fall, one cannot but wonder about the Egypt’s elections. Are they going to be for real this time or are they going to be ‘as usual’? Though I hope for the former, am betting on the latter.